Factors that influence the recruitment of patients to Phase III studies in oncology: the perspective of the clinical research associate.
(65/960)
BACKGROUND: The multiple determinants of a patient's decision to enter into a clinical trial have been explored largely from the perspectives of patients and their physicians. Little research has involved clinical research associates (CRAs) formally, despite their central role in the process of recruitment. The current study was initiated to explore the factors that influence the decision of patients with cancer regarding clinical trial entry, specifically from the perspective of the CRA. METHODS: Two focus groups of CRAs from the Hamilton Regional Cancer Center were organized. A skilled facilitator guided both groups through exploratory and subsequent confirmatory phases of discussions, which were audiotaped for review and coding using a process of consensus employing intercoder triangulation. RESULTS: The two groups identified a number of factors that they believed influenced the recruitment process. Numerous physician and patient factors were reaffirmed, such as the impression of the scientific merit of a study or the sense of personal benefit, respectively. More uniquely, CRAs identified information transfer within the informed consent process as a major aspect of their specialized role. It was believed that full disclosure of information, in terms of both the content and the techniques and styles of delivery, was an important predictor of recruitment success. The groups quickly reached consensus on which factors they believed were the most important overall with respect to influencing study recruitment. CONCLUSIONS: CRAs appear to have a unique role in the process of recruiting patients to active clinical trials. They believe that they have an important influence on recruitment success. Further research to validate this impression is required, because, ultimately, a greater understanding of the relative roles of physician and patient factors and, potentially, CRA factors will be important in the development of ethical and supportive strategies to optimize the recruitment of patients with cancer into randomized clinical trials. (+info)
Update on the role of topotecan in the treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer.
(66/960)
Ovarian cancer is the fifth leading cause of cancer death in women. Most patients with ovarian cancer respond to first-line chemotherapy, but many relapse within 18 to 22 months. The development of efficacious salvage therapies that increase overall survival while maintaining quality of life is a great challenge in the treatment of this disease. Topotecan, a novel topoisomerase I inhibitor, is currently indicated for the treatment of recurrent metastatic carcinoma of the ovary. In patients with relapsed ovarian cancer, the overall response rates on treatment with topotecan range from 19%-33% in platinum-sensitive patients, 14%-18% in platinum-resistant patients, and 5%-11% in platinum-refractory patients. The proportion of patients achieving stable disease ranges between 17% in refractory and 48% in sensitive patients. In phase III studies, topotecan was shown to be equivalent in efficacy to both paclitaxel and liposomal doxorubicin as second-line therapy in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer. Further, non-cross-resistance between topotecan and paclitaxel was demonstrated in a third-line, phase III crossover study, suggesting that topotecan may be effective in the first-line setting with paclitaxel and/or platinum. Hematologic toxicities include neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia; however, these toxicities are usually short lived, noncumulative, and manageable with dose modifications, including low-dose topotecan regimens. Nonhematologic toxicities are usually mild to moderate in severity. These data support the use of topotecan for second-line therapy and suggest that topotecan may also be effective in first-line therapy. Further studies with topotecan alone and in combination with other agents are needed to fully characterize the role and sequencing of topotecan in the salvage and first-line settings. (+info)
Emerging role of topotecan in front-line treatment of carcinoma of the ovary.
(67/960)
The conventional front-line chemotherapy strategy for advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma has become adjuvant administration of platinum (carboplatin and cisplatin), either alone or, most often, in combination with a taxane. However, a number of active agents have been identified in phase II/III trials of second-line and salvage ovarian cancer patients that may augment this front-line strategy. One agent, topotecan, has antitumor activity comparable with paclitaxel in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer and is an established treatment in second-line or salvage settings. Additionally, its mechanism of action is different from paclitaxel and is nonoverlapping. These properties, coupled with the in vitro synergy observed in tumor models among topotecan, paclitaxel, and platinum, have provided the rationale for investigators to examine topotecan in front-line ovarian cancer therapy. A number of strategies for incorporating topotecan into front-line therapy are under active investigation, including the replacement of paclitaxel with topotecan, a triplet regimen with cisplatin or carboplatin and paclitaxel, a consolidation regimen consisting of several courses of a platinum agent and paclitaxel followed by several courses of topotecan, and a sequential doublet regimen in which patients receive platinum in every course as part of a doublet with alternating or sequential topotecan and paclitaxel. Preliminary data from ongoing clinical trials of these new regimens show favorable response rates and generally manageable toxicity profiles. This review summarizes the preliminary clinical findings associated with the four strategies and outlines ongoing and future randomized studies of topotecan in front-line ovarian cancer. (+info)
Early detection of toxicity and adjustment of ongoing clinical trials: the history and performance of the North Central Cancer Treatment Group's real-time toxicity monitoring program.
(68/960)
Prospective clinical trials are the gold standard for evidence-based methodology used to support changes in the practice of medicine. Clinical researchers, regulatory agencies, payers, and the public embrace the conduct of phase I, II, and III clinical trials as integral to improving patient care. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) funds a number of cooperative oncology groups to conduct such clinical trials in the United States. In order to protect enrolling patients, the NCI requires expedited reporting to allow rapid identification of severe side effects on NCI-sponsored clinical trials. However, chemotherapy drugs frequently cause predictable side effects, the rapid reporting of which would potentially overwhelm the system. This article describes the development and documents the performance of a real-time toxicity reporting system implemented by the North Central Cancer Treatment Group. The goal of this system is to supplement the currently required NCI adverse event monitoring procedures and to permit study teams to identify the need to modify ongoing clinical trials. The system has proven its value in the monitoring of phase II and III trials, including trial N9741, a three-arm, phase III, advanced colorectal cancer chemotherapy study exploring combinations of irinotecan, oxaliplatin, and fluorouracil. We believe the methods described present opportunities for improving patient safety in clinical research. (+info)
Treatment for anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer.
(69/960)
As a result of increasing anthracycline use earlier in the course of breast cancer, oncologists are frequently faced with the challenge of treating patients whose disease has progressed during or following anthracycline therapy or who are ineligible for further anthracycline therapy. Many of these women remain candidates for cytotoxic chemotherapy, and several treatment options exist. Until recently, the taxanes, docetaxel in particular, were widely regarded as the most effective therapy for these patients, based on a survival advantage observed with docetaxel. However, a recent phase III study demonstrated that the addition of capecitabine to docetaxel results in superior overall survival (with a 3-month improvement in median survival), superior time to disease progression, and a superior response rate, with a manageable safety profile. Capecitabine/docetaxel is the first cytotoxic combination to improve survival over standard monotherapy in patients with anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer. Moreover, the survival benefit can be attributed to the addition of capecitabine, as it was achieved despite the lower dose of docetaxel administered in the combination arm. Quality of life was maintained with capecitabine/docetaxel combination therapy, which further supports the use of this regimen in patients with anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer. Pharmacoeconomic modeling using the data from the phase III trial has shown that the capecitabine/docetaxel combination therapy is highly cost effective when compared with other cancer treatments that improve survival. This review describes several treatment options for patients with anthracycline-pretreated breast cancer, including the phase III data (efficacy, tolerability, quality of life, and pharmacoeconomics) for capecitabine plus docetaxel in this setting. (+info)
Analysis of the safety and efficacy of intra-arterial thrombolytic therapy in ischemic stroke.
(70/960)
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Intra-arterial thrombolytic therapy (IAT) may be a treatment option for patients with ischemic stroke. We analyzed the safety and efficacy of IAT on the basis of published data. METHODS: We searched computerized databases for studies using IAT in >/=10 patients with ischemic stroke. Some studies had control patients for comparison. Data were collected on age, stroke territory, time to treatment, medication, site of arterial occlusion and recanalization on angiogram, outcomes, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH). RESULTS: The analysis included 27 studies with 852 patients who received IAT and 100 control subjects. There were more favorable outcomes in the IAT than in the control group (41.5% versus 23%, P=0.002), with a lower mortality rate for IAT (IAT, 27.2%; control group, 40%, P=0.004). The IAT group had an odds ratio of 2.4 (95% CI, 1.45 to 3.85) for favorable outcome. SICH was more frequent in the IAT group compared with the control group (9.5% versus 3%, P=0.046). The subgroup of patients receiving a combination of intravenous thrombolytic therapy and IAT had more favorable outcomes than the IAT alone subgroup, but this trend did not reach statistical significance (53.6% versus 41.5%, P=0.1). Among the patients treated with IAT, those who had supratentorial strokes were more likely to have favorable outcomes than those with infratentorial strokes (42.2% versus 25.6%; P=0.001; odds ratio, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.33 to 3.0). CONCLUSIONS: IAT for ischemic stroke appears efficacious but carries an increased risk of SICH. Further prospective studies are needed to prove the safety and efficacy of IAT in stroke. (+info)
Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors for the treatment of erectile dysfunction in patients with diabetes mellitus.
(71/960)
Sildenafil, a phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5) inhibitor, has become a first-line therapy for diabetic patients with erectile dysfunction (ED). The efficacy in this subgroup, based on the Global Efficacy Question, is 56% vs 84% in a selected group of non-diabetic men with ED. Two novel PDE5 inhibitors, tadalafil (Lilly ICOS) and vardenafil (Bayer), have recently completed efficacy and safety clinical trials in 'general' and diabetic study populations and are now candidates for US FDA approval. A summary analysis of the phase three clinical trials of sildenafil, tadalafil and vardenafil in both study populations is presented to provide a foundation on which the evaluation of the role of the individual PDE5 inhibitors for the treatment of patients with ED and DM can be built. (+info)
Impact of epidermal growth factor receptor expression on survival and pattern of relapse in patients with advanced head and neck carcinoma.
(72/960)
A correlative study was performed to address the impact of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) overexpression on survival and pattern of failure in patients with advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs) enrolled in a Phase III trial and randomized to receive conventional radiotherapy. The study population comprised 155 of 268 (58%) randomized patients with sufficient pretreatment biopsy specimens for immunohistochemical assay. The specimens were dewaxed and incubated after standard preparation with mouse monoclonal antibodies recognizing the extracellular domain of the EGFR molecule. The catalyzed product was visualized with 3,3'-diaminobenzidine Chromogen Kit and lightly counterstained with Mayer's hematoxylin. Quantitative EGFR immunohistochemistry (IHC) was done with SAMBA 4000 Cell Image Analysis System, without knowledge of the clinical outcome, to yield mean absorbance (MOD), staining index (SI), and quick score (QS). These EGFR IHC parameters were correlated with the T stage, N stage, combined stage grouping, and recursive partitioning analysis classes. Subsequently, the EGFR parameters were correlated with the outcome end points, i.e., overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), local-regional (LR) relapse, and distant metastasis rates. We found that HNSCCs exhibited a wide variation in EGFR expression (MOD, 0.2-66.0; SI, 0.3-97.0; QS, 0.01-69.9) with a relatively strong but nonlinear correlation between MOD and SI (r = 0.79). There was no correlation between EGFR expression and T stage, N stage, stage grouping, and recursive partitioning analysis classes (r = -0.07 to 0.17). The OS and DFS rates of patients with high EGFR-expressing HNSCCs (>median MOD) were highly significantly lower (P = 0.0006 and P = 0.0016, respectively) and the LR relapse rate was highly significantly higher (P = 0.0031) compared with those of patients with low EGFR-expressing HNSCCs. However, there was no difference in the distant metastasis rate between the two groups (P = 0.96). Significant correlations, although somewhat less robust than MOD, were also observed between SI and QS and the OS, DFS, and LR relapse rates. Multivariate analysis showed that EGFR expression was an independent determinant of survival and a robust independent predictor of LR relapse. In summary, this correlative study in a large series of patients revealed that EGFR expression, which varied considerably among HNSCCs, was a strong independent prognostic indicator for OS and DFS and a robust predictor for LR relapse but not for distant metastasis. The data suggest that EGFR IHC should be considered for selecting patients for more aggressive combined therapies or enrollment into trials targeting EGFR signaling pathways. (+info)